Waht undemocratic arrogance to call an election and possibly deter participation.
The actual turnout will decide.

Non political reasons especially the weather and any barriers caused by Sandy and the disgraceful attempts to restrict the franchise.

Then there is the EC with potential unfaithful electors..Perhasp the system would be altered if it mattered the unelected Federal Reserve will continue pulling the strings whoever the marionette may be in the National beauty contest.

If Mitt is crushed a wake up for the GOP to flush off the tea stain if Obama flops will it be Hilary's overture? God bless America for few else do.

It would seem that Mr. Obama has many more ECVs at risk under the Economist's curious invention of the "Leaning to toss-up" category.

If we put the generous TE "Leaning to toss-up" credits given to Mr. Obama, back into the "neck and neck" pot, Mr. Obama loses 52 ECVs of the 253 ECVs which TE generously credits him. That takes him to 201.

If we put the meager TE "Leaning to toss-up" credits given to Mr. Romney back into the "neck and neck" pot, Mr. Romney's ECV figure drops only slightly to 191.

Interestingly, 201 and 191 is what the web site RealClearPolitics has the candidates at respectively.

The Economist shows its rampant biases once again. Take the RealClearPolitics figures, ignore the margins for error, and bake up a faux comparison.

Offensive journalism once again.

America does not need to be lead down the path to mediocrity like the UK. Yes, one imagines the Economist editors would like some company to reduce their loneliness, but one hopes it won't be coming from America. Maybe they should embrace the French.

Wow man that post was informative. Considering the average margin in MN is +5% leaning to toss-up is generous and actually pretty conservative. For Romney to win there would have be a built in bias toward Obama greater than 4% for him to win or for it to be reasonably close. The funny thing is simple Economics tells us that no rational actor, Pollster, would undermine their future profitibility simply because they "like" on option more than the other. That would be ridiculous and actually be a good piece of evidence to use against the Rational Actor theory in the first place. Which is actually a worse outcome for Republicans than the polls being right because it undermines their entire economic ideology. Rather than getting angry at a Nuetral foreign news outlet like the Economist which has no vested interest in this race and is surprisingly conservative on its Toss-up definitions go police voting stations for Voter fraud and make sure there aren't any Black Panthers scaring old white ladies. If you really want to feed your delusion try dickmorris.com it is written at a third grade level and should suffice.

If I were an American, I would vote tomorrow for... basketball or dinner with the family. Choose from a bad or a bad not a big choice.
Nevertheless, Obama better choice than another candidate, at least he is more "flexible". So, good luck, mr.Obama.

Nice image. I bet he wishes he could have flipped instead of flopped on the auto bailout. Kind of makes him look like a big bad jerk to blue collar Ohio and Michigan, That's an awful lot of voters to alienate.

Hedgy is not noticably a lefty. He just has no use for folly and stupidity -- whether from right or left. (And probably not much use for Senator Reid either -- it's just that Reid was irrelevant to a comment on the Presidential race.)

A) He is the leader of a party in one of the houses, voted by the other Senators.

B) He's not the most powerful man in Congress. I could argue it is Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee, or John Boehner Speaker of the House, or Eric "Ideolog" Cantor, as all spending bills - and goose-stepping - begins in the House.

C) If Ryan wants to play the "religion card" he has to know there will be backlash by those who are not Evangelicals
(then again, maybe BY some Evangelicals).

Actually, the Speaker of the House is considerably more powerful, as evidenced by the fact that the position is number two for succession, and for that matter, David Inouye, President pro tempore of the Senate, is more powerful.

The Mormons (and/or their wholly owned interests) hold a good deal of the mining and timber rights in this country. That's an awful lot, and it seems as though there may be a concerted effort of some kind happening here. I am frightened of any organization that came up with their foundation in this manner, what with golden tablets and hats and polygamy and other craziness going on.

Can you say Cult? Compare it to Scientology, another very high grossing "religion". There are some interesting parallels, if you are really into economics you will notice them, if not back to your sandbox and stop making other people's arguments for them.

Hi there Stan, thanks for your reply...I am not sure what you mean by discrimination on income intelligence, all have access to free education in many nordic countries, and like I say their's are the currencies to invest in over this economic hardship. I think is is rough that the middle classes are the main tax payers and propping up everyone without getting much back, I'd be mad too.In the US the top 10% of the population gets 48 cents of every dollar earned. The social mobility of the US is imagined.This income distribution is not good for anyone except the corporations, particularly the middle classes.Your system favours corporation's rights over individual citizens, hence the environmental and social impact of lots of their industries from porn to fast food to oil. Sure we have corporations too, but we also have more checks legally and socially to make sure they serve the community rather than just preying off it.I don't blame you for being cross at paying large taxes and then shelling out huge amounts for education and health.I think associating European socialism with soviet communism doesn't make sense and is black and white distorted thinking. Totally different creatures.

I am a Brit living in the US and I am always astounded at the way
Americans talk about social policies in Europe as tho they are the same thing as Communism under the USSR -
they are very, very ignorant of foreign affairs anyway so you all have to be a little tolerant - they get led around by their noses by the vested interests, which Mr Romney well represents - see his "47% comments" for where he REALLY is on the lower classes.
Just one point - you should know that over here ALL Americans who are not actually wealthy consider themselves 'middle class' - it is just a propaganda thing that is used to make them all feel good.

You are wasting your breath. For example, pick a country and ask 100 Americans to point it out. Tell them a body of water it is adjacent to and unless it starts with pacific or atlantic (or the gulf with all our oil in it) they will stare at you blankly.

If they can't grasp geography, then geopolitics is sure as hell out, forget about world history (how did those borders get there anyway?) and then you can say socialized medicine is a bad thing after being hospitalized for a week in switzerland or italy with no health insurance. How about the single mom of 4 schoolteacher on food stamps voting for Romney? Makes no sense. Evolutionarily speaking we are already dead.

Americans do not like to think. Every political discussion I get into revolves around me making an observation and seeing if there is evidence to support a cause, and the Fox junkies do what their talking heads do, foam at the mouth about how he is not even a US citizen. Like the FBI or the CIA can be fooled by a social organizer. The FBI has computers and sh!t.

What totally baffles me is the assertion that policies that consider the whole community are 'unchristian' and cater to lazy people. If you are socially excluded, what is the point in trying. We are all brothers and sisters, like our kids some need more nurturing than others, not to be sent away from the dinner table hungry because we can fight our way to the front of the queue. Society should be a nurturing force, not a jungle or rat race that is scary to walk around without a gun due to anger and inequality. What people in the US pay for education is astronomical, I was looking at postgrad degrees in my profession 40K fees A YEAR, and the salaries there are not that high...add astronomical health insurance(that costs about three times more than my TOTAL yearly tax bill where I live, I don't think there is even maternity pay in the US (so much for valuing the family)...and I don't think there is even pensionable rights...a very poor deal for your money invested in society...because what is being spent there by middle class people is not flowing back in...I think we get a good deal for our money up here, it's not perfect, but where I live, there are certainly a lot less social problems, (it's not utopia) there is more care beyond tribalism associated with particular religious affiliations and it's pretty safe to walk home at night in the city here

Regardless of what happens in this election on Tuesday there is roughly a 0% of Romney breaking 300 electoral votes which means that no Republican will have received 300 electoral votes in 20 years. This has to be a disturbing trend for Republicans. There problem is becoming systematic and soon it may be impossible to win the primary and the general election. Bush won two terms with 272 and 284 EVs and Clinton and Obama will most likely have 300+ EVs in their 4 elections.

This is astounding and means for the sake of their party they are going to have to start distancing themselves from their fringe to be a successful national party again. I have done a very scientific straw poll of 4 affluent Republicans and 3 are voting Obama and the other isn't voting. Why? Because of the Mitt they saw in the primary. All four would have voted for Massachusetts Mitt or even 2003 Mitt but they can't trust him because of how far to the right he had to go in the primary. I know this is a really low number of people and really is only scientific if you are from Alabama but in reality it aligns itself with the endorsements from Powell, the Economist, and Mayor Bloomberg. Everyone who isn't from the South fears the Republican fringe and it will slowly doom the party nationally unless they have a moment of clarity which would be great for everyone. That is why people are going to vote against the Republicans more so than for Obama. By the way elelction.princeton.edu just put re-election probability for Obama at 98.2% so this is pretty much a done deal. Time to move forward with or without the Republican party.

Looks like you are going to be very disappointed. I guess you have been turning away from the fact that almost all the polls are based on a democrat voter turnout equivalent or higher to that in 2008. Which it will not come close to.
The following article by Real Clear Politics, a bi-partisan pollster, is very informative.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/11/03/obamas_failure_with...
There will be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth by lefties next week. They won't be able to believe how their buddy Nate Silver led them astray so far.
I am in for some amusing times.

RCP has their split at 290-248 Obama. For Silver and every single other poll agregate to be wrong at the same time would require an extremely consistent and uniform democratic bias. The only people assuming a Romney win are using gut feelings so it will probably be the "lefties" laughing when Ted Nugent's head explodes on Youtube. The fact that a clear partisan like the author of that article will only go as far as to predict 278-260 Romney actually coincides perfectly with my initial post which would continue the 300 EV drought even under those unlikely circumstances. So that piece actually makes my confidence rise so thank you for the uplifting link. He actually thinks Obama will lose Wisconsin a state that hasn't gone republican since 1984, an epic Reagan landslide, there is almost no chance for him to win there he hasn't lead in a poll there in months and only Rasmussen has gone far enough to give him a tie. So I flipped Wisconsin and it ends up like 2000 all over again 270-268. The fact that he is conceding Ohio and hinging on Wisconsin, Iowa and New Hampshire should tell you all you need to know and that is from a known partisan. It is looking really grim for Romney when right wing pundits are throwing there hat in the 278 no Ohio projection especially considering Republicans never win when they don't carry Ohio. Obama will end up with between 290 and 333 EVs and win the popular vote by 1.5%. Book it.

Just checked Rasmussen's daily tracking poll showing a national 49-49 tie and more importantly that Romney is only getting 58% of the white which is significantly lower than what he needs to win. Most of the estimates I have seen have said he needs to be in the +60% range to even compete and yes this is the data from Rasmussen so the news gets even worse for Mitt.

So this morning as I was cherry picking polls to make me feel better about an almost certain outcome I found this one poll showing Obama 49-45 National but it was by some lefty pollster Democracy Corps. Wait a second why would I look at one poll when I could look at an average of all of them like RCP? RCP has there no toss-up projection at 303-235 just like almost every other aggregate. As a side note I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today, this is how I punish myself for making bad decisions on the weekend, and literally listened to him say he only trusts Dick Morris polling because it aligns with his "gut feeling" about the race. When Rush isn't confident it does not bode well for Romney. Rush is confident about things that are obviously false alot so that is the 35th subjective nail in the coffin since you are only interested in subjective analysis as you continue to cherry pick favoralble polls.

Interesting to see. That is with a national poll of voters. I assume the reference to voters means likely voters?

However, it seems the electoral college still initially favors President Obama:

"The Rasmussen ....projections now show the president with 237 Electoral Votes and Romney 206. The magic number needed to win the White House is 270. Eight states with 95 Electoral College votes remain Toss-ups: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin."

I think it is possible Romney could pull out a win, but this will be a nail biter.

This is sad though: "Just over one-out-of-four Americans (27%) say the upcoming election has negatively affected their personal relationship with a friend or family member."

Ummm...falsify - you were looking at the non-toss up numbers. That, to me, is not an accurate description on the ECV right now. I think you need to start with the RCP electoral map (201-191 Obama not counting the toss ups) and then look at the polls in the battleground states. Right now, it is like reading tea leaves. Turnout will be key in FL and OH. If OH goes to Obama, that virtually seals the deal. If OH goes to Romney, then we could see him pull a "Dewey Beats Truman" again...

To be honest I think RCP is too conservative on their calls they require +5% to move out of that category for both candidates. They do a good job but are guilty of removing polls they think are biased. That is why I like Silver in that regard because he includes them all and then adds weighting to their value based on past data. Dr. Wang doesn't even make a bias assumption and includes every poll regardless of their past performance and adjusts for outliers by using the median instead of the average. That is the cleanest approach because it avoids potential subjective biases

Now that the election is over - People have elected President Obama, majority of Democratic Senators and majority of House Republicans; it’s time to congratulate all participants - voters, volunteers, officials, candidates and elected officers and move on with the real business of Nation Building, starting with:

• Over the next ten years, putting the fiscal house in order. Raise more revenues, cut waste and foolish spending ( as example Defence of the whole world, putting too many people in prisons, Drug Enforcement to moderate social behaviors, Police cost to enforce paranoid security agenda), and gradually reduce the debt (this is what Canada did –otherwise we can go into a tailspin and recession).

• Build an Economy based on Knowledge & Innovation Technology. Banking, Insurance and Wall Street must not be allowed to rip off the American People again.

• Invest in HealthCare, Infrastructure and Education. This will build the foundation of the economy.

• Modernize the Elections. Please Florida – this is a joke and an embracement to US Democracy.

"So he'd better stick to the plan and gain consensus from voters over the next for years"

Have you been living under a rock for the past 6 years? Romney has been a bigger flip-flopper than even Kerry and has shamelessly pandered to the far right before cynically changing his positions like an etch-a-sketch. His positions continue to change about every other week.

Romney is the one who is willing to say anything to get elected. Many naively wish that he would be a more pragmatic person in office, but with Norquist et. al and a rabid Republican base breathing on his neck, that probably isn't going to happen, or he'll face a primary challenger in 2016.

After the elections, will TE give us an overview of who donated what, and why? 'Citizens United' has paved the way for vested interest to pay its way into power.

Yes, I know that in the past TE argued that because the funds land on both sides, and because it has not been proven to be the sole determinant of the outcome elections, it's not a problem. But the editors have had some more time to think about it, they are not stupid, and they may come to more sensible conclusions now.

Wall street, Big Oil and other vested interests don't support election campaigns out of pure generosity or care for the American people. It's an investment. Returns are expected. It's rent-seeking.

You Obama supporters have your heads up your political butts!!! Obama has spent us into certain poverty!!! Even his own cabinet says his spending will increase to over 20 trillion over the next 4 years. That is from 10 to 20 trillion in 8 YEARS!!! Bush spent too much!!! Obama is Bush 4 times worse!!! Our national debt is 4 BILLION a day!!! and increasing every second!!! The only reason Obama may win is because there are too many people on the public umbilical cord. Just remember when the private sector dies (the head) so does the body (government). Socialism starts and eventually they build a wall around you because there is no incentive to work,slavery (Communism)results!!!

You don't really know what communism is, do you...?
And socialism, you have no idea at all, I can tell. I have lived most of my life in socialist democracies, and believe me, people on average are a lot better off than most Americans are now.
Just because someone waves the red(socialist/communist/whatever-you-want-to-call-it) flag in front of you doesn't mean that you should react like an impulsive farm animal and charge an attack on it. (I do realize that it's not actually the color red, but the movement that makes bulls attack, but bear with me for example's sake)

Hello Stan,
Please read the Preamble of the Constitution carefully. It reads “We the People of the United States,... establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare .... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It’s the PEOPLE who make the United States of America. Business interests are often at odds with national interests: For example - environment, banking, healthcare, social security etc. just to name a few. Don't be scared, Europe (for the most part) and Canada are also socialistic and are doing very well, the business is thriving, and people are happy.

Recognize it or not USA was created to “promote the general Welfare” of the people.

Living in northern europe, I feel safe walking home at night from the centre of town, the sight of someone sleeping rough is unusual, our high street is made up of small businesses selling high quality goods that we like to keep, people flock to the centre of town and our market at the weekend, I am not frightened of the youth or of getting sick. Our municipality holds regular free festivals for culture that everyone in our community young and old attends for music, food, art....We are still in recession, but the blow of it is softened by what you call socialist policies...We don't live in fear of not being able to pay medical bills (half of bankrupcies in the US are caused by inability to pay medical bills, and we certainly don't pay anything near the 12K you pay as a family on average for health insurance, sure it's not perfect and we probably pay a bit more tax than you but get a lot of security and quality of life back...

Living in northern europe, I feel safe walking home at night from the centre of town, the sight of someone sleeping rough is unusual, our high street is made up of small businesses selling high quality goods that we like to keep, people flock to the centre of town and our market at the weekend, I am not frightened of the youth or of getting sick. Our municipality holds regular free festivals for culture that everyone in our community young and old attends for music, food, art....We are still in recession, but the blow of it is softened by what you call socialist policies...We don't live in fear of not being able to pay medical bills (half of bankrupcies in the US are caused by inability to pay medical bills, and we certainly don't pay anything near the 12K you pay as a family on average for health insurance, sure it's not perfect and we probably pay a bit more tax than you but get a lot of security and quality of life back...

Living in northern europe, I feel safe walking home at night from the centre of town, the sight of someone sleeping rough is unusual, our high street is made up of small businesses selling high quality goods that we like to keep, people flock to the centre of town and our market at the weekend, I am not frightened of the youth or of getting sick. Our municipality holds regular free festivals for culture that everyone in our community young and old attends for music, food, art....We are still in recession, but the blow of it is softened by what you call socialist policies...We don't live in fear of not being able to pay medical bills (half of bankrupcies in the US are caused by inability to pay medical bills, and we certainly don't pay anything near the 12K you pay as a family on average for health insurance, sure it's not perfect and we probably pay a bit more tax than you but get a lot of security and quality of life back...

It is great that you feel safe and all the wonderful things you experience, but it will eventually end because human nature always destroys the nature of personal motivation when all are paid equal or near equal for vastly different jobs. What seems to be good now will only get worse, such as Greece, Spain and other European nations. Communism did not start all by itself, it starts by rejecting Capitalism, socialism follows, and finally ends in state control, Communism.It is in all our future if we do not promote economic personal prosperity based on one wiliness and education to work hard and as a result prosper. I am not saying we have the perfect system, there are none, but I do believe it is the best. American prosperity is the leader of the world because in promotes individual responsibility. Communism is in the future if all are paid the same or very near the same. Why would one go to 12 years of medical school if he can drive a truck (respectable work) but does no have the same financial or social investment. You are right about the medical costs, and we need to have better cost control, but that is primarily do to the welfare state that we are becoming-not because of Capitalism. I work with the welfare Department-the vast majority of clients are lazy!!! Today, I was not looking for a job but was offered one just because a man noticed I worked hard. That is what all the world needs to be about instead of sitting on their butts! expecting others to take care of them. Self responsibility must be rewarded!!! It is human nature!!!

Oh,and as far as our medical insurance is concerned is because it it the best in the world. People come from all over the world because we are the best. Yes! we need to find middle ground, but the government has no business being involved in the medical field. It is the our responsibility to find and pay for the best care. GOVERNMENT ONLY CREATES A FALSE BELIEF THAT IT CAN CARE FOR EVERYONE-BUT IT REDUCES CARE AND DESTROYES!!! EVERYTHING IT TOUCHES!!! SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, MEDICAID-ALL ARE BROKE!!!!

And how are you going to get national debt down by raising defence spending from 3 to 4 per cent GDP, while cutting taxes, as Romney has stated he wishes to do? If your definition of servitude is debt, and you want to be in thrall to such servitude, then go ahead and vote Romney in.

I don't believe in communism, that is as much an oligarchy as pure capitalism, but in the current economic turmoil being experienced in the world, the safer currencies to invest in are the nordic ones and swiss, countries with much less inequality, and hence greater stability. Instability tips the balance towards extremism and blaming of external forces, a kind of helplessness too. I think you would find the standard of living in Denmark, Germany, Holland, Switzerland and other socially responsible countries far far off those a communist state, yet there is greater social control regarding looking after each other and the environment because human rights are seen as very important. Education at a higher level is still free in most of the nordic countries, and if you are bright enough and from a disadvantaged background and want to, you will go to medical school without living several decades under debt. Countries with high levels of inequality are much less safe, the US has a massive problem with violent crime and I think this has to do with inequality, exclusion and the fury it unleashes.

You can not define how to "promote the general welfare!" I suppose you believe it is taking (by force) money from one group of people to give to another! that is not the Constitution! I know the Constitution very well, and I do not need you to tell me what is supposedly says. Canada lowered their business tax rate (America has raised it) that is why they are doing well. Europe is not as you say, no matter what you write. Greece and Italy prove that.

When the private sector (people producing a good of service not tax based (by government)it creates revenue for the public sector (taxes) and thus pays down and reduces government debt. It really is simple.

If you have lived most of your life in socialist democracies and liked it so much, why are you not still living there now and have to put up with the USA who is inferior to them in your eyes, LOL. And if you are not living in the USA, how do you know that the Americans are not living better than your beloved socialist democracies? Liberals like to speak with both sides of their mouths.

If you have lived most of your life in socialist democracies and liked it so much, why are you not still living there now and have to put up with the USA who is inferior to them in your eyes, LOL. And if you are not living in the USA, how do you know that the Americans are not living better than your beloved socialist democracies? Liberals like to speak with both sides of their mouths.
I used to live in socialism most of my life and I prefer capitalism in the USA hands down. Some American are beguiled by glib liberals, and they do not know what a good thing they've got until they lose it. The fact that the 2nd largest economy nowadays, Red China, is moving towards capitalism and away from socialism speaks volume. And the current financial crisis occurring in mostly socialistic Europe further confirm that.

If you have lived most of your life in socialist democracies and liked it so much, why are you not still living there now and have to put up with the USA who is inferior to them in your eyes, LOL. And if you are not living in the USA, how do you know that the Americans are not living better than your beloved socialist democracies? Liberals like to speak with both sides of their mouths.
I used to live in socialism most of my life and I prefer capitalism in the USA hands down. Some American are beguiled by glib liberals, and they do not know what a good thing they've got until they lose it. The fact that the 2nd largest economy nowadays, Red China, is moving towards capitalism and away from socialism speaks volume. And the current deep financial crisis occurring in mostly socialistic Europe further confirms that.

So you guys discriminate based on income intelligence-very sad. I am middle class and we (wife and I) pay our taxes and because we are neither rich or poor I have to send my child to a secondary college while I support someone who paid no taxes, was financial burden all their lives go to the best schools still on my and the tax payer dollars. Unions, government and welfare in America are killing us. You can work for 20 years and retire with about 90% of their highest wage. That and other reasons are why we are broke. Many People in the private sector in America work hard and get taken advantage of. We are really tired of it!!! Liberal government gives money to those who will not work! I deal with it every day. If you would get rid of government employees and unnecessary welfare, Romney would win every state! Thanks for sharing, though. Blessings!

Yes i do know about Communism and Socialism. Former USSR collapsed! North Korea-near collapse! Cuba-near collapse! Freedom has helped more countries in the world than any other political system man has ever made! Do not bother to reply, I do not listen to foolishness!!! from foolish people!!!

Social inequality in the US is growing and will continue to grow as long as demonizing the poor continues to be the common thought among the right in America. This thought that the poor are lazy sponges is what makes America different from those in other developed countries (yes there are some that think this way but predominantly not). The rich are continually getting richer in the US and the poor getting poorer. This without a doubt leads to more poverty, crime, desperation and in America's case incarceration. Yet in America its perfectly fine to use public funds to lock up criminals for petty crimes, yet to offer social assistance is seen as lazy people living off the government dole. Go to any city in America and then Walk around in any city in Europe or Canada. The poverty, desperation and safety are noticeably better taken care of.

Promoting general welfare for all remember?? 50 million people do not have insurance. Hundreds of thousands go bankrupt every year due to medical bills. 18% of your GDP is spent on health care (by far the most in the world). Explain to me how its the best again. I mean if you have a lot of money, America is has the best medical care. If your are lower middle, to poor, you are screwed. This does no seem like the best system in the world to me.

Again youre not noticing the immense amount of difference between socialism and communism. The former and current countries you just mentioned are all practitioners of communism which started out purely communist after a communist revolution, they were never socialist societies-turned-communist, and while North Korea undoubtedly is on the verge of shooting itself in the foot big-time (due to their self-imposed isolationism and general lack of common sense regarding foreign policy), there arent many indicators of any eventual downfall besides the amount of ridicule and tongue-lashings they get from the US and allied countries. I'm a dual American-German citizen who lives in America, and having lived in both Germany and America and seen the different systems of each country i can honestly say that if a better, more prosperous society is the goal of the Americans than they should look for inspiration in Northern Europe. You complain about everyone having similar wages in a social democracy but thats simply not true: while taxes are higher in Germany wages are dependant entirely on where, how long, and what job, just like in America. Welfare is much, much harder to take advantage of and in order to have access to welfare in Germany it almost always (there are exceptions: disabilities, etc.) requires that they are providing in society in some way shape or form whether it be community service or volunteer work. Taking advantage of the system is practically impossible in comparison to America's system. From my experience as a man who has lived between these two worlds, the key to prosperity is reform hopefully towards a more progressive social democracy inspired system.

stan roam:
You say Obama has just about destroyed the USA financially.
Romney has still given no specifics about how to pay for the extra $8 trillion he plans to spend/lose etc...
Plus, he says his plan "Will not increase the deficit". I have one question for him: "Will it decrease the deficit, then?" If not there is ABSOLUTELY NO POINT in going on with this plan

Romany is great flier and flip-flopper, he just keeps claiming and fooling people
that knows how to fix economy without any specific and his fake Tax plan that does NOT even
add up for sure not going to be passed,
I am not going to vote for this fake Guy that his own record shows that
un-employment, deficit and jobs outsourcing got increased and his state
got highest unemployment rate in nation when he was governor of Massachusetts.

Romney's presidency will be worse than Bush that has caused us recession.

last debate shows clearly that Romany is out of touch and not ready for prime time and especially for 3 AM call.
he and his VP have zero foreign policy credentials and want to restore Bush era again.

Romney is great lier and flip-flopper, he just keeps caliming and fooling people
that knows how to fix economy without any specific and his fake Tax plan that does NOT even
add up for sure not going to be passed,
I am not going to vote for this fake Guy that his own record shows that
unemployment,deficit and jobs outsoursince got increased and his state
got highest unemployment rate in nation when he was governor of Massachusetts.

Romney's presidency will be worse than Bush that has caused us recession.

last debate shows clearly that Romney is out of touch and not ready for prime time and especially for 3 AM call.
he and his VP have zero foreign policy credentials and want to restore Bush era again.

"The fourth and final Howey/DePauw Poll also shows Republican Mitt Romney leading Democratic President Barack Obama 51%-to-41% in Indiana" according to http://www.depauw.edu/news-media/latest-news/details/29135/ dated November 2, 2012. Note that is consistent with other recent polls of Indiana and with The Economist's own comment "it is unlikely that he [Obama] will win the state this year". So, colour Indiana (with 11 EC votes) red not blue.

Indiana was blue when I made the comment -- I swear it was, really!
Apparently the folks at The Economist since changed it to red (as it should be) and didn't tell anyone about the change. Does that seem a bit improper to you, or is it just me? Folks at The Economist: please tell fdennstedt what you did... my credibility is on the line.
Note that gossypol Nov 2nd, 17:02 (below) saw the same thing.
Also, poll aggregators have Indiana as a "strongly Romney" so it should be dark red, not light red, IMHO.

Am I the only person who's suddenly missing the EV distribution bar that used to be above the graph, which would now show a majority of EV for Obama, if these newest changes were applied?
I mean, why would you take that piece of statistic away? I found it useful in seeing how many EV's each candidate was missing to gain a majority, and hope to see it back sooner rather than later...

Nothing much has changed today? Indiana went from solid red to blue. Michigan went from light blue to solid. New Hampshire and Virginia went to light blue as well (I know Virginia shifted, but I may have mixed up New Hampshire as I follow several different polls).

Romney has Indiana. otherwise, the TEA baggers undermined the Republicans in gaining a Senate seat out of myopia and general bizarre-ness (why get into a conversaton of rape, even if the departure point is abortion. Just say you would consider exceptions. End of story.)